click to show more information

click to hide/show information About your Search

20121222
20121230
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6
and he never went back until the last week of the election. it's really puzzling. romney had a shot there. go there after you pick someone from that state and you never go back? host: why was john kerry's enormous wealth and not an issue in 2004? guest: it was, but that campaign was so much defined by 9/11, john kerry, and the swift voting issue. the problem is not enormously wealthy candidates, but can they make a pitch to the working-class voters. it does not matter what is in your bank account of what is out there in public. guest: part of the reason john kerry of losses because he and his wife were characterized the same way they did to rodney as the out of touch, french looking couple who cannot relate the middle class americans. guest: in the even does become a little bit of french. guest: it was an issue in 2004 and it was very harmful in terms of his character. host: you write about this in the book, this ad that came out just before the election and it played heavily in ohio. let's watch. "washington journal--- >> fact checkers say his attack on romney is false. he is a plan to h
was thinking slower-elect, you know what i'm saying? >> remember this humble moment. [laughter] say that one more time. >> what does it mean to you personally [inaudible] -- >> i think what it means to me personally is that 18 years ago the city of charleston county county-wide gave me an opportunity to represent him based on values and issues. a couple of years later the folks from the house gave me an opportunity to represent their issues and their values. two years ago the first district gave me an opportunity to represent their issues and values. what i've not ever heard on the campaign trail was besides the fact that you're black or because you're black, here's what we want to do. they've asked me questions about values and issues, and that's an amazing thing. i think it speaks to the evolution of south carolina and of our nation. it speaks to the heart of the good people in our nation and specifically of our state. i would say this -- more importantly than the complexion that i have, i think back to growing up in a single-parent household. i'd love to speak to the single moms out there
've had the opportunity working with their folks in their states and all around the country, to elect some new people to the senate that are bringing the right ideas and some new voices to those principles that we know have made our country successful. and so i feel like as i leave the senate that we are leaving it better than we found it and that our focus now, despite the difficult challenges, is really on america and how we turn america around. i should spend a lot of time and most of my time on thanking my staff. i have to say that my greatest inspirations have come from the staff that i've had the opportunity to serve with in the house and the senate. as all of you know who are serving here in the senate, this country is being run by people in their 20's and 30's who get us so busy that they're having to follow us to meetings to tell us where we're going and what we'll be talking about. but it's incredible to see that these young people, particularly those that i've served with, have such a passion for our country and freedom, and they're willing to put it all on the baseline to make
republican votes in the house. he would get an absolute majority and would not be elected speaker in the first round. >> robert williams says that we need to cut spending. sequestration was a democratic deal. deal with it. guest: i would call that a deal between the republican congress and president. the whole point of sequestration, if we remember, was not to have to take effect. the point was to have such a bad outcome that the super committee that was created in the august 2011 debt ceiling deal be so afraid of the sequestration that they would reach a bipartisan compromise that would reduce deficits by the same amount that sequestration was expected to, but in a much more balanced and sensible way. democrats and republicans were unable to reach an agreement and that is why you have this sequestration. sequestration was never intended to be policy. it was intended to be so bad and foolish than democrats and republicans would be forced to agree to something. obviously, that calculation perhaps mistook the level of disagreement there was between republicans and democrats on this
not familiar with everything that was mentioned in that article. two months before the election, there was this big tough-on- china -- >> the pivot was announced almost a year before that. what set of the discussion of the exhibit was the announcement -- pivot was the announcement of rotating 2000 marines throughout australia. i do not think china should be fearful of 2000 marines hit in australia. -- in australia. our engagement with other countries throughout the asia- pacific region will focus on more cultural, economic assistance as well as military collaboration. even with china itself, we're engaging more with china. this has been from the very beginning of the obama administration and is also part of the pivot. the pivot is not just focusing our attention on the other countries of the asia-pacific to the exclusion of china. it means all of the asia-pacific including china, which is why secretary clinton has been to china seven times. yet had defense secretaries gates and panetta -- we have had defense secretaries gates and panetta and many other cabinet officials go to ch
will be one of these overnight major election shifts, not a gradual buildup. i also think we have missed the online website version of that. part because it has not shown its reliable and secure. there is a very rapid emerging -- i think it will sweep through the country similarly with your cellphone is essentially part of your identity for processing. >> there will be some experimentation -- it will be lots of little elections and all of a sudden it will hit a major state or national. every state will have to have it. at that point we will see the tipping point. >> not that i would disagree with any of this, but i do think one of the differences is that identity in that form can only be given by government. there are lots of identities that can be given by your bank. if you look at sweden -- a deputized their banks so that they were sort of in lieu of government. you got a credential that the government would recognize. there may be ways to do that. >> we have seen precedent for that with electronic benefit transfer. they use the power of the reserve and deputize the bank's. >> yes. >>
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6